From owner-in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com Mon Jun 12 08:30:52 2000 Return-Path: Received: from lists.io.com (majordom@lists.io.com [199.170.88.15]) by pyramid.sjgames.com (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA28226 for ; Mon, 12 Jun 2000 08:30:51 -0500 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by lists.io.com (8.9.3/8.9.1a) id IAA30803 for in_nomine-digest-outgoing; Mon, 12 Jun 2000 08:26:32 -0500 Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2000 08:26:32 -0500 Message-Id: <200006121326.IAA30803@lists.io.com> From: owner-in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com (in_nomine-digest) To: in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com Subject: in_nomine-digest V1 #1672 Reply-To: in_nomine-l@lists.io.com Sender: owner-in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com Errors-To: owner-in_nomine-digest@lists.io.com Precedence: bulk in_nomine-digest Monday, June 12 2000 Volume 01 : Number 1672 In this digest: IN> The Death of Superiors IN> Mathus Strikes Again! IN> Theurgy Re: IN> Endgame: The Beginning of the End Re: IN> IN Rant 1 - The Problems Re: IN> Theurgy IN> Rewards by Superiors Re: IN> Theurgy Re: IN> Rewards by Superiors Re: IN> Theurgy Re: IN> The old Eli Re: IN> Knotty Choir question Re: IN> Disturbance, and It's Disturbing Consequences Re: IN> Theurgy IN> Self-Stoppers (was The old Eli) Re: IN> Fwd: Some stuff IN> Munchkin Rule Of Thumb Re: IN> Theurgy ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2000 15:37:22 -0400 From: "Charles Phipps" Subject: IN> The Death of Superiors Okay in my mind Superiors and all word bound Celestials are effectively awesomely powerful it's just a matter of understanding exactly how to best use one's word. I wanted basically angels in my game to be less "Prophecy" and more "Gods who are mortal". So I instituted some house rules I think are interesting... * Basically in my game Word bound Superiors are tied to to the Symphony like a dam in a river...once the Seraphim Council gathers it's strength around you or Lucifer zaps you. All the Symphonic energy that enters the Symphony through your word flows directly through you. You aren't a pebble in the river of it if you catch my drift and the word is yours to direct, command, feel. Game effects: I give this as lots of little effects that have place in game play-such as complete knowledge of things pertaining to your word. The Jordi Seraphim of Tweety Birds knows where every tweety bird in the world is, how badly-nicely he's being treated, and likely how long he's going to live and what his name is, favorite dish, birdseed is. Perhaps even whenever a tweety bird will be in a cartoon or television resource or their existence threatened. The word of Forgetfulness might know everything that's ever been forgoton on the mortal world.... Given Archangels this is pretty amazing power and allows them to coordinate big time superiors, soldiers, mortals to the betterment of humanity. * The Word bound when the dams are destroyed and a torrent flows into the mortal world. If the Demon of Floods is destroyed then expect wherever he died from the Movaii desert to Southern California to be flooded...and I mean big time. If the Word of Networks in the main book dies-expect world wide crashes across the board. All your Y2K nightmares come true. Eventually the world will recover but the onslaught torrent of the Celestial's power is a big honking disturbance in the Symphony. * Haagenti and the Death of Mariel. Basically Haagenti in my opinion started out as a nasty Familar who was abused repeatably but was able to survive angelic attacks etc and gradually move his way up to Calabim. In my opinion as the Word of Gluttony he gained the ability to devour forces from foes, he already had a bunch of support from the more aggresive of Sloth's demons (like Adam from the book) and Haagenti devoured the word bound of the rest of Mariel's demons. The superior lying around Lazilly like Jaaba the Hutt was so taken off gaurd he hardly fought back as he was eaten of every ounce of forces he had. In the mortal world meanwhile the 80s happened when Sloth died...couldn't even do a decent Cold War. Kobal certainly helped Haagenti arrange this all, he put in the word for the demon to be Gluttony. However he didn't attack Mariel or anything like that...he just knew the demon was old, weak, and lazy. * Killing Deliah Deliah in my game is the Demon Princess of Hate, a Minor Superior who has alot of her thunder stolen from Malphas and Baal truth be told. However as a Habbalah and the sister of one of our PCs (made as the counterpart to him by Eli) she's effectively a good behind the scenes villian. In my game she's likely going to die or be redeemed at the climax of the game...which will cause soem ripples in heaven. Destroying her will likely take the aid of a Nephilim and Uriel's heart (which is still in Heaven and a focus for energy despite it apparently isn't tied to it). It will be a big event Celestially and likely destroy alot however it's possible as she turns the symphony of heaven against her. My basic calender is: 10 angels equal the average word bound, 100 angels or 10 word bound equal a minor superior, 1000 angels will equal the average Major Superior. 3 Superiors equal Yves. 2 equal Kronos or Michael. This has some variance with distinctions. So basically Baal if he could get Michael alone in hell could send about 2000 thousand demons and a horde of damned souls (because Michael is tenacious-even if it is an even fight) and after they're done with him, easily finish him off. - -Charlemagne ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2000 14:24:16 -0700 From: "Matthew W." Subject: IN> Mathus Strikes Again! Servitor attunements all around to those who are so wonderfully supporting my Word! Take that, Timothy! I shall quickly push this mailing list towards its Fate by locking it up in never-ending repeative rants and reactionary rants. Not even Archangel Beth will be able to oppose me when my plot comes to fruition. Ahahahahaha! - -- = Mathus = = Demon of Rants = = ArchRival of Timothy = = MIB #3875 = | Lead GM - In Nomine LARP Austin | | http://members.aol.com/sumitr/index.html | ===================================================== "Koalas look cuddly, but I am lead to understand that they're actually irritable, solitary beasts who do not want belly rubs. What kind of mocking God created creatures with poofy ears and big black noses that don't want belly rubs?" - L. Fitzgerald Sjöberg ===================================================== ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2000 00:22:13 +0100 From: "Christopher Lee" Subject: IN> Theurgy Hi everyone! A question for Elizabeth, David, et al. I have mentioned this before but I did not get any feedback (probably because it was in vague and muddled tones!) Is anyone currently working on any rules/background/etc for Theurgy? David mentions it in the Corporeal Players Guide, but not in any more specific a way than to define it. I have just acquired a whole load of information and was thinking about putting together some rough sketched rules for it and some background, but i don't want to bother if anyone 'official' is on the case. I have also come up with what I think is an interesting seed for a Theurgy plotline: Christopher Marlowe (English Elizabethan playwright, wrote Doctor Faustus) was an unsavoury character. He was in prison once, bound over to keep the peace once and arrested for heresy (aparently he suggested Jesus and John the Baptist had a fling!). He also worked as a dodgy secret agent for the infamous Francis Walsingham. In between he wrote some decent plays, Faustus, Tamberlaine, etc. However, he was sadly murdered in a pub brawl. Or was he? What if he really was a dodgy old character. So dodgy that those reported heresies were the least of his crimes and he was in fact Hellsworn. He did after all write Doctor Faustus. So what if he faked his own death, became Undead (and perhaps wrote Shakespeare's plays - but that's beside the immediate point). Ever since he has pursued Theurgy, forming and husbanding a secret society that has spent centuries researching and testing techniques to try and harness angels. They are a formidable adversary, and they have nearly succeeded. Marlowe himself is a an ancient Undead with major powers. Chris Lee ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2000 19:21:58 -0400 From: "EDG" Subject: Re: IN> Endgame: The Beginning of the End I liked this, a lot. ^_^ Very often I'll start my own writing with excerpts from Books which don't really exist, or which I postulate to have been fictionally written - in fact, one entire 70k piece is the Book of K'kreth-once-Andreiel, a former angel of Judgment, detailing the fall of Dominic and his own subsequent fall, but I won't go any farther into that. The content also looks promising, and I look forward to seeing more of it. Casca, pending the release of more chapters, may I have permission to post this on the INC? - -EDG ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2000 21:27:52 -0400 (EDT) From: "Rev. Pee Kitty" Subject: Re: IN> IN Rant 1 - The Problems On Sun, 11 Jun 2000, Chris wrote: > Big Problem 1 - Word Forces suck. There should be no such mechanic. If > something like this needed to be on a sheet, no player should ever be > trusted to earn a Word. Only the GM should track how well a Word does, but > the celestial will just *know* when it's waxing or waning. I disagree strongly, simply because of two situations. In other situations, it's simply enough for the GM just to handwave it, which is why they made it an optional rule, I'm sure... 1) Wordbound NPC going up against a regular PC with approximately the same forces and resources. According to canon, the Wordbound has "extra power to draw on" from his word... what is it? What does the Word of Soap Operas give you? Making up new stuff on a case-by-case basis is hair frazzling; Word Forces answer this nicely (basically, it gives extra Essence. Cool.) 2) PC gets a Word. It's supposed to be a BIG deal, and all you get is a rite? It's a nice way of simulating the extra power from being Wordbound without unbalancing things. > Big Problem 2 - Major Inconsistencies - Too many changes to things. > Canon is just too fluid and the feel of the game is suffering for it. > Sometimes it's too light, and sometimes it's just plain bland, and there is > no consistency of character to the major powers. New writeups are good, but > they fail to address the simple fact that they had to be re-written to fit > into canon and maybe, just maybe, some consistency will appear. (Not > holding breath - examples - Baal suddenly being AA of Valor before Fall and > his odd relationship with Michael described as good friends and as rivals Can't argue with you at all on this one. Yup. > Big Problem 3 - Archangels and Demon Princes should not be Gods. They aren't. > The idea that *nothing* can realistically take them on and hope to > succeed is very disappointing. That's not the case. Another Superior can take on a Superior and hope to succeed. It's been suggested that, perhaps, a few hundred thousand Servitors in a suicide charge might be able to take out a Superior... or maybe it was a few million... Anyways, PCs really have no hope at all of taking on a Superior by themselves, and winning. I don't see that as a problem AT ALL. If you feel differently, then give your Superiors hit points and stats... refer to the original AD&D Legends and Lore books for inspiration. > Big Problem 4 - The basic mechanic is far to simplistic and doesn't > allow for any form of realistic control. It's just too wild to be used at > all. A CD of 6 is huge, and you have a 1 in 6 chance of getting it. Just > too wild. Reign it in somehow. Or better yet, dump it and do something > better. Go for it. > Big Problem 5 - The setting is just way too light. Darken it. A lot. That's called "flavor to taste", man. Turn your brightness knob down - the game *certainly* allows for it! You can easily shift this game into a dark, dark setting without much effort at all... just like you can make it as bright as romantic fantasy with ease. That's one of the things I like about it. > Big Problem 6 - Just what is the point of humans in a game where they > can go squish at any time an angel or demon really wants them to, > disturbance be damned? They ARE the point. Sure, an individual human might be squicky, but HUMANITY itself is the key. Read the CPG for advice...it's actually QUITE easy to make even the most minor human more important than ANY of the PCs. - -- Rev. Pee Kitty, of the order Malkavian-Dobbsian Meow! "Ninety-nine percent of life is what you make of it, so if your life sucks, you suck." -- Mike Muir ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2000 12:48:42 -0700 From: "Patrick O'Duffy" Subject: Re: IN> Theurgy > A question for Elizabeth, David, et al. Guess I'm Al, then. > Is anyone currently working on any rules/background/etc for Theurgy? > > David mentions it in the Corporeal Players Guide, but not in any more specific a way than to define it. I don't know that Theurgy (assuming you mean 'good' sorcery) needs much in the way of further quantification. The powers would be the same - the main difference is the attitude. And of course, initiation would not come from Kronos; presumably Yves also controls an Angel of Theurgy who initiates white sorcerers (albiet fewer of them). Or are you talking about sorcery that can bind/control angels? > Christopher Marlowe (English Elizabethan playwright, wrote Doctor Faustus) was an unsavoury character. He was in prison once, bound over to keep the peace once and arrested for heresy (aparently he suggested Jesus and John the Baptist had a fling!) Possibly; possibly he was falsely accused of such. There were many accusations made against Marlowe; it's unlikely that they were all true. Although he almost certainly was gay. > He also worked as a dodgy secret agent for the infamous Francis Walsingham. Well, define 'dodgy'. He was a secret agent commanded by the Queen's spymaster. It's been suggested a few times that Marlowe was in fact the 'James Bond' of the Elizabethan era. I think it may have even been established in Bond-canon that Marlowe _was_ the first 007. But I'm no Bond fan, so I can't confirm that. > In between he wrote some decent plays, Faustus, Tamberlaine, etc. 'Decent' plays? Yeah, and that Michaelangelo can sure paint a decent ceiling. > However, he was sadly murdered in a pub brawl. > > Or was he? What if he really was a dodgy old character. Dodgy young character. Marlowe died before he was 30. > So dodgy that those reported heresies were the least of his crimes and he was in fact Hellsworn. He did after all write Doctor Faustus. So what if he faked his own death, became Undead (and perhaps wrote Shakespeare's plays - but that's beside the immediate point). You might have guessed from the above that I'm not as hard on Marlowe as you are. I agree that Marlowe's a great choice for being an Elizabethan sorcerer; there's evidence he knew Dr. Dee and Francis Bacon, at least in passing. But Hellsworn? He really didn't seem the type. Bit of a heretic, bit of an arse-bandit, bit of a spy, certainly - as well as an accomplished poet and playwright. But Hellsworn? A young man, devoted to his Queen and his art? Don't really see it. (Oh, and you don't 'fake' your death and become Undead. You actually die. You just organize it well.) > Ever since he has pursued Theurgy, forming and husbanding a secret society that has spent centuries researching and testing techniques to try and harness angels. > > They are a formidable adversary, and they have nearly succeeded. Marlowe himself is a an ancient Undead with major powers. However, I do like this idea a lot; I think there's enormous potential in such a group. I wouldn't use Marlowe in the role, but there are others that could certainly fit. I could even see Francis Bacon in the role, if I were being cynical; even Giordano Bruno, if I were being very _very_ cynical. Keep up the ideas! But if you go with this, you might want to do a bit more research into Elizabethan England and pick a character with a bit more resonance than Marlowe. (Hmmm. Keep the group, but have Marlowe as a saint still fighting them? That's got potential as well.) - -- Patrick O'Duffy, Brisbane, Australia And here in these streets are the things that we want: sex and birth, votes and traits, money and guilt, television and teddy bears. But all we've actually got is each other. You decide what that means. - Spider Jerusalem, TRANSMETROPOLITAN #22 ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2000 22:46:09 -0400 From: "Charles Phipps" Subject: IN> Rewards by Superiors I'm in a peculiar position regarding some of my PCs in In Nomine, basically recently they discovered an infernal plot to poison a Canadian city's water supply by Diabolicals working for the Demon of Hate with a tainted chemical that they'd been testing for Fleurity. Basically the chemical once injested would make people especially angry irritable and unpleasant and kick off alot of violence before harmlessly breaking up (and becomming undetectable). The players suceed in making a pact with some ethreals and get some of freya's tears as a quick purifying agent (through some serious negioation and nearly getting killed by Thor-not to mention "justify Uriel's crusade" and otherwise apologize racially for their ancestors) the night before after destroying the demons involved (one forever)-A Ethereal tether exists nearby and they didn't have time to go to heaven to try and find a cure. Ergo this got me thinking about exactly what would be a good reward for PCs who acomplished this little escapade (Two Celestials and Two heavy combat soldiers). On a more extensive game note (so this just isn't helping my campaign) I was cuirous what people thought was the kind of achievement that meritted a personal reward from one's superiors-exactly what does qualify one for a distinction, reward, etc in your opinion. The kind of activities and levels that would seriously garner a person "infernal" and "angelic" attention. I know it varies tremendously but a "experience table" might somewhat help makes things alittle easier in the future for me I guess.. - -Charlemagne ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2000 22:00:11 -0500 From: David Edelstein Subject: Re: IN> Theurgy Christopher Lee wrote: > Is anyone currently working on any rules/background/etc for Theurgy? No. Canonically, it doesn't exist. It's only mentioned in the CPG as a rumor, which GMs might choose to expand upon in their campaigns. But canonically, sorcery can't summon or command angels, period. - -David ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2000 22:03:54 -0500 From: David Edelstein Subject: Re: IN> Rewards by Superiors Charles Phipps wrote: > On a more extensive game note (so this just isn't helping my campaign) I was > cuirous what people thought was the kind of achievement that meritted a > personal reward from one's superiors-exactly what does qualify one for a > distinction, reward, etc in your opinion. The kind of activities and levels > that would seriously garner a person "infernal" and "angelic" attention. I > know it varies tremendously but a "experience table" might somewhat help > makes things alittle easier in the future for me I guess.. I guess this would be a good time to plug the Game Master's Guide, which has an entire section on how Superiors reward (and punish) their Servitors. IOW, exactly what you're looking for. :) - -David ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2000 23:18:51 -0400 From: Whistling in the Dark Subject: Re: IN> Theurgy At 12:48 PM -0700 6/12/00, Patrick O'Duffy wrote: > > A question for Elizabeth, David, et al. > >Guess I'm Al, then. You *could* be my bodyguard -- I could be your long lost pal... >I don't know that Theurgy (assuming you mean 'good' sorcery) needs >much in the way of further quantification. The powers would be the >same - the main difference is the attitude. And of course, >initiation would not come from Kronos; presumably Yves also controls >an Angel of Theurgy who initiates white sorcerers (albiet fewer of >them). > >Or are you talking about sorcery that can bind/control angels? I think he means the latter -- at least, that's what the CPG lists as Theurgy, and implies it's just a myth (but who can say for sure?) > > He also worked as a dodgy secret agent for the infamous Francis Walsingham. > >Well, define 'dodgy'. He was a secret agent commanded by the >Queen's spymaster. Well, he's a *touch* Dodgy. Especially since there's some evidence that while he worked specifically for William Cecil, Baron of Burghley (who as head of the Queen's Privy Council was M, more or less) *and* worked for Francis of Walsingham, simultaneously. And while both Cecil and Walsingham were devoted to Elizabeth, they most assuredly were *not* devoted to one another. Indeed, there's some speculation that the tavern brawl he died in was engineered by Walsingham to eliminate Marlowe after Marlowe proved to be throwing in with Cecil. > >> In between he wrote some decent plays, Faustus, Tamberlaine, etc. > >'Decent' plays? Yeah, and that Michaelangelo can sure paint a decent ceiling. And note that there was a certain "moral certitude" to his plays. Faustus wanted to know too much, and sold his soul to gain that knowledge, and then was condemned to Hell forevermore. It was more a cautionary tale than anything else (and some say Faustus was supposed to be symbolic of Dr. John Dee, which could be something of a Heavenly Agent opposing a Hellsworn. Or, truly, vice versa.) > > So dodgy that those reported heresies were the least of his >crimes and he was in fact Hellsworn. He did after all write Doctor >Faustus. Faustus came to a *very* bad end. >You might have guessed from the above that I'm not as hard on >Marlowe as you are. I agree that Marlowe's a great choice for being >an Elizabethan sorcerer; there's evidence he knew Dr. Dee and >Francis Bacon, at least in passing. Almost certainly the latter. Possibly the former. > > Ever since he has pursued Theurgy, forming and husbanding a >secret society that has spent centuries researching and testing >techniques to try and harness angels. >> >> They are a formidable adversary, and they have nearly succeeded. >>Marlowe himself is a an ancient Undead with major powers. > >However, I do like this idea a lot; I think there's enormous >potential in such a group. I wouldn't use Marlowe in the role, but >there are others that could certainly fit. I could even see Francis >Bacon in the role, if I were being cynical; even Giordano Bruno, if >I were being very _very_ cynical. This has Dee's name all over it, too. Mm... or throw in some Dutch or French or Spanish of the era, who never got over it.... >Keep up the ideas! But if you go with this, you might want to do a >bit more research into Elizabethan England and pick a character with >a bit more resonance than Marlowe. > >(Hmmm. Keep the group, but have Marlowe as a saint still fighting >them? That's got potential as well.) I like that. Or... say it was Bacon or Dee. Have them make Marlowe into an unwilling Mummy, and have him be a Heaven Soldier, fighting for a glory forever denied him. I think Kit would like that, in a certain way... - -- Eric Alfred Burns | in-sabre@annotations.com | Writer - Manager - IT Type - Poet Boy - In Nomine Freelancer ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2000 22:40:37 -0500 From: "David Rodemaker" Subject: Re: IN> The old Eli > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "David Rodemaker" > To: > Sent: Saturday, June 10, 2000 10:03 AM > Subject: Re: IN> The old Eli > > > > > > Yup. Poor Dom, became AA after the Fall (appointed by God if I read the > > timeline correctly) but there has been no one to temper his Judgement with > > Justice or Mercy... > > Yes he does. APG - The Angel of Mercy - to insure all of his judgements are > fair. Admitedly, not an AA, but there IS the Angel of Mercy. Yes and there is an Angel of Equal Justice also... The Other David ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2000 21:30:07 -0700 (PDT) From: Maurice Lane Subject: Re: IN> Knotty Choir question Date: Fri, 09 Jun 2000 01:31:39 -0500From: David Edelstein Subject: Re: IN> Knotty Choir question Maurice Lane wrote: >> Any suggestions? Or is there just no way to fit >>this Word among the Host? :) >You neglected Ofanim. I did, didn't I? My bad. I'm not sure that one would be the best choice, anyway (though the Choir Attunement would be _very_ useful). Possibly a little _too_ prone to promote alternate viewpoints. >Besides them, I think Elohim and Mercurians are both >viable. A Mercurian is supposed to be a Friend of >Man, but unlike a Kyriotate, he _can_ put people in >uncomfortable positions, even get them into trouble, >if it's for the greater good. But would the Mercurian _like_ the job? Well, depending on the brightness/contrast of a campaign, maybe. :) >And I think an Elohite would be perfectly suitable >for Heresy; what other Choir could evaluate >heretical ideas as objectively as a Power? They could >calmly consider which heresies are useful and which >ones are harmful, without recoiling in horror from >ideas that would shock other angels on principle. So >that would be my choice. >(Of course, if the Elohite gets too attached to any >particular heresy, or suppresses one he really >doesn't like, a Habbalite would also make a perfect >Demon of Heresy....) I agree that Elohim have the necessary balance for the job. I'm just concerned from a practical viewpoint: Elohim seem more vulnerable than other Choirs, especially in areas where emotions are rife. >I'm not sure if Dominic and Laurence would let a Word >like "Heresy" get past the Seraphim Council, though. They might not have much of a choice. YMMV and all that, but I see the Seraphim Council as being controlled by no one faction or individual. Sure, Dom and Larry have a lot of pull (and they'd both HATE the idea), but then, so does Mike (who hates Dominic), David (who likes small, fervent groups of people standing up for their beliefs) and Yves (who might like the idea. Or not. You could make a case either way, albeit a case that reflects your own leanings more than his). Also, Marc and Jean would probably both like the idea (heretical notions in business and science can lead to new innovations, and Jean especially wouldn't mind seeing some positive reinforcement for humanity), not to mention Janus (for obvious reasons). Add in a little politicking, a favor or two called in, and a little bit of trading ("OK, Dominic, give us the Word and Jean will set up that voice mail service for your Triads that you've been angling for. Yes, and we'll throw in free service on the cell phones...") and hey presto! New Word-bound. Not that Dominic will _trust_ him/her/it, mind, but what the heck... - - -David------------------------------ Morgan (FAW) __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Photos -- now, 100 FREE prints! http://photos.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2000 21:39:07 -0700 (PDT) From: Maurice Lane Subject: Re: IN> Disturbance, and It's Disturbing Consequences Date: Fri, 9 Jun 2000 11:09:29 -0400 From: Whistling in the Dark Subject: Re: IN> Disturbance, and It's Disturbing Consequences At 10:52 AM -0400 6/9/00, John Karakash wrote: >> Walter, this is clever beyond belief. Why not >>say thatDisturbance, non-canonically of course, >>causes _odd_ effects in addition to the direct >>sensing the Symphonically aware can manage. Rain of >>frogs, crop circles, seas turning to blood, >>everyone flushing their toilet at the same time, >>albino alligators,whatever. Crop circles are an >>interesting physical manifestation of the >>disturbance in the Symphony, much like complex >>ripples in a pond. >Oh. I. *Like.* This. Same here. >We could even break it down a bit. Certain "Neutral" >effects (Crop Circles, the odd Frog Rain, suddenly >discovered Stone Circles and the like) could be >Disturbance from either side. Certain "Positive" >effects (Sudden disease remissions, various religious >statues being seen crying, crucifixes bleeding from >the stigmata and the like) would be angelic. Certain >"Negative" effects (anything seen in "The Amityville >Horror") would be demonic.- -- >Eric Alfred Burns I was going to ask, "What about ethereals?", when I realized it didn't matter. Let the GM work out positive/neutral/negative effects and let the players scratch their heads (a Triad that captures a beneficial ethereal this way is going to have _real_ problems with the "punishment must fit the crime" part of their dissonance conditions). Heck, let the effects match up with the PCs/NPCs actions, rather than their side: having a party of demons' disturbance translate to miracle cures at the local orphanage is a great way of telling the party that they Screwed Up Really Good this time. :) Morgan (FAW) __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Photos -- now, 100 FREE prints! http://photos.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2000 17:21:22 -0700 From: "Patrick O'Duffy" Subject: Re: IN> Theurgy Whistling in the Dark wrote: > You *could* be my bodyguard -- I could be your long lost pal... Bags I get to be Chevy Chase and not Paul Simon. He's too short. > I think he means the latter -- at least, that's what the CPG lists as > Theurgy, and implies it's just a myth (but who can say for sure?) The way sorcery is arranged in IN - that it's a power bestowed by one side or the other - I don't see that this sort of Theurgy is actually doable. If Hell could bind and control agnels, the War would already be over; and Heaven's not about to allow humans to enslave their own. Of course, it's still something that sorcerers could _try_to do. And maybe some clever human will come up with something that can affect any Celestial. But I certainly see why it was never allowed into canon. > Well, he's a *touch* Dodgy. Especially since there's some evidence > that while he worked specifically for William Cecil, Baron of > Burghley (who as head of the Queen's Privy Council was M, more or > less) *and* worked for Francis of Walsingham, simultaneously. And > while both Cecil and Walsingham were devoted to Elizabeth, they most > assuredly were *not* devoted to one another. Indeed, there's some > speculation that the tavern brawl he died in was engineered by > Walsingham to eliminate Marlowe after Marlowe proved to be throwing > in with Cecil. Really? Cool. Didn't know that. I admit that my Marlowe knowledge is fairly cursory; I did a bit of research for using him as an NPC in a game once, and I studied English Lit, but I don't know that much about the chap. (Apart from thinking that Rupert Everett was an exceptionally good choice to play him in SHAKESPEARE IN LOVE...) > And note that there was a certain "moral certitude" to his plays. > Faustus wanted to know too much, and sold his soul to gain that > knowledge, and then was condemned to Hell forevermore. It was more a > cautionary tale than anything else. Exactly. Not out of the question for Marlowe to be a Hellsworn; but given his plays and poems, he would have been quite a subtle one. > (and some say Faustus was supposed > to be symbolic of Dr. John Dee, which could be something of a > Heavenly Agent opposing a Hellsworn. Or, truly, vice versa.) Now _that's_ cool. > >However, I do like this idea a lot; I think there's enormous > >potential in such a group. I wouldn't use Marlowe in the role, but > >there are others that could certainly fit. I could even see Francis > >Bacon in the role, if I were being cynical; even Giordano Bruno, if > >I were being very _very_ cynical. > > This has Dee's name all over it, too. Mm... or throw in some Dutch or > French or Spanish of the era, who never got over it.... Or an even longer undead Machiavelli or da Vinci... hell, throw in the Holy Vehm and the Priory de Sion while you're at it! Where's Kenneth Hite when you need him? > I like that. Or... say it was Bacon or Dee. Have them make Marlowe > into an unwilling Mummy, and have him be a Heaven Soldier, fighting > for a glory forever denied him. I think Kit would like that, in a > certain way... I personally hate the 'virtuous undead' idea; I'm fine with the _idea_ of undead repenting, but I'd rather never see a heroic mummy appear in a game. I could see the murdered Marlowe offered Sainthood by Michael, though... (You know, an all-Saints game could be fun. Heroes, poets and spies of the ages, fighting the forces of the Hellsworn through the ages, and into the present day... there's definitely a campaign in that...) - -- Patrick O'Duffy, Brisbane, Australia And here in these streets are the things that we want: sex and birth, votes and traits, money and guilt, television and teddy bears. But all we've actually got is each other. You decide what that means. - Spider Jerusalem, TRANSMETROPOLITAN #22 ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2000 07:41:38 -0400 From: David Wood Subject: IN> Self-Stoppers (was The old Eli) Quoth David Rodemaker on 6/11/00 11:40 PM: >> ----- Original Message ----- From: "David Rodemaker" >> To: Sent: Saturday, >> June 10, 2000 10:03 AM Subject: Re: IN> The old Eli >>> Yup. Poor Dom, became AA after the Fall (appointed by God if I read the >>> timeline correctly) but there has been no one to temper his Judgement with >>> Justice or Mercy... >> Yes he does. APG - The Angel of Mercy - to insure all of his judgements are >> fair. Admitedly, not an AA, but there IS the Angel of Mercy. > Yes and there is an Angel of Equal Justice also... And then, to an extent, Dominic is reigned in a by his own Word. Just a bit, anyway... Dominic's Word of Judgement has something of a connotation of Justice behind it: administering punishment in the event that someone does wrong. This makes Dominic and his hierarchy something of judge, jury, and executioner... ...but for his Dissonance conditions, and the fact that overstepping one's authority and administering a punishment greater than the crime committed (or allowed by circumstances) would not only be an abuse OF the Word, but punishable BY the Word as well. I'd have to say that Dominic, moreso than any other Celestial, is reigned in by his own Word and prevented from meting out a punishment greater than is called for by a transgresson. As Jean said, Dominic is Heaven's Regulator ...and he even works to some extent on himself. That covers the Justice angle, anyway. Now, for Mercy, it depends how political a game you run. If it's not political, then Dominic supported the Angel of Mercy in his attempt to get his Word himself. If it's highly political, then the Word was granted by the Seraphim Council *against* Dominic's wishes and protests. Could make his career an interesting one... It makes you wonder what other Words have been introduced under other Archangels in order to prevent their Words from getting too out of control, doesn't it...? - --David http://skipjack.bluecrab.org/~dwood "I love the surgical garment. Enjoy the delights of the Victor Mature abdominal corset. Sail down the Nile on the Bleed-It Kosher Truss. And don't forget the Herculese Hold-'em-in, the all-purpose concrete truss for the man with the family hernia." -Monty Python, episode 26 ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2000 09:39:52 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> Fwd: Some stuff >>From: "mink" >>Subject: Some stuff >>Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2000 19:08:18 +0100 >>A) Do celestials need to sleep and eat, what about the vessals.. do they >>need food and such like, i would look in my books but they're at a players >>house. No, celestials (including those on Earth in vessels, including Kyriotates and Shedim in hosts, etc.) do not need to eat or sleep. They can "sleep" with a Will roll to wander the Marches, but they do not create dreamscapes. >>B) Is it just me or is the lilim ability from Valefor just a bit powerful... It's just you -- go look at Vapula's. >>C) Does _anyone_ know why a Mummy was used as the demon charecter in the >>main rule book, surely a demon would have been better... (page 37) Probably to illustrate that you _can_ play characters who are not celestials. >>D) Just hw militant are Jordi and Novalis? they often are over looked for >>the fighting abilities by a lot o folks i feel, but that maybe due to the >>"M" factor* Jordi can be militant in some circumstances, not in others. Novalis is not militant -- she's about PEACE, not war! Just don't push her Servitors' backs to the wall -- they _can_ use violence as a last resort. >>E) In the final trumpet how're you supposed to get the players from one >>country to another.. Planes, trains, automobiles, Tethers, Superior Fiat, whatever. The adventure has some bugs. (Okay, the adventure has a lot of bugs. At Too Early In The Morning Fussy Baby Won't Sleep time, I can't muster up anything but some apathy. Read the digests -- those go through the adventure several times over to spot the holes.) - --Beth, catching up as she can, typing with a baby (iolanthe) in her lap. But now with a computer desk! Vapitalizatoin and spelling still difficult, typing w/ 1 hand (and often a wigglebaby in the other). ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2000 09:39:57 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: IN> Munchkin Rule Of Thumb Totally IMO, of course. If the player wants Superiors to have hitpoints so he can kill them, it's munchkinism. If the player trusts that the GM will provide the opportunity to slay the targeted Superior at (or in, or around) the climax of the campaign, that's epic. (Walter, the spouse, added a rephrasement of the first paragraph to the effect of, "If you want to resort of out-of-character knowledge of mechanics so you can plot how to kill something, that's munchkin.") - --Beth, catching up as she can, typing with a baby (iolanthe) in her lap. But now with a computer desk! Vapitalizatoin and spelling still difficult, typing w/ 1 hand (and often a wigglebaby in the other). ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2000 09:40:01 -0400 From: Elizabeth McCoy Subject: Re: IN> Theurgy At 12:22 AM +0100 6/12/00, Christopher Lee wrote: >Is anyone currently working on any rules/background/etc for Theurgy? The summoning of angels, right? A NONCANON thread was on the Pyraboards... My contribution to the NONCANON thread was the NONCANON remark of: As for summoning angels, I'd suggest that it's more of an "invocation" and "beacon" to the right place. So if an angel picks up on a "pager" like this, it can ascend to its Heart and then descend to the point of invocation. (This gets around the "can't invoke anyone but a Superior" clause by being a human-only sorcerous ritual.) If they don't want to go celestial, then they can still get the tug-tug in the right direction, akin to one of the relevant Songs or the Cherub resonance. I'd allow invocation of angels based on: Word (aka, "the patron of X"), nature (aka Choir; you'll have to figure out what maps to what), Servitor of X (close to Word), and True Name. And probably the ever popular, Oh God Send Me Someone Who Can Help RIGHT NOW! O:> This has been an exerpt of me providing NONCANON suggestions for a NONCANON ability. At 5:21 PM -0700 6/12/00, Patrick O'Duffy wrote: >Whistling in the Dark wrote: > >> You *could* be my bodyguard -- I could be your long lost pal... > >Bags I get to be Chevy Chase and not Paul Simon. He's too short. > >> I think he means the latter -- at least, that's what the CPG lists as >> Theurgy, and implies it's just a myth (but who can say for sure?) > >The way sorcery is arranged in IN - that it's a power bestowed by one side or >the other - But it's not -- it's bestowed by demons, yes, but there are self-initiations which sorcerers used for quite some time which have no ties to either side. - --Beth, catching up as she can, typing with a baby (iolanthe) in her lap. But now with a computer desk! Vapitalizatoin and spelling still difficult, typing w/ 1 hand (and often a wigglebaby in the other). ------------------------------ End of in_nomine-digest V1 #1672 ******************************** The material here is (C) 2000 Steve Jackson Games, Incorporated. All rights reserved.